Nato’s war in Kosovo has wrought a firestorm of blistering controversy worldwide. And the brunt of it is falling squarely on the United States.
Russia has dealt America slap after slap over Kosovo. Formal Russian protests began immediately, along with conspicuous support for Slobodan Milosevic. Russia kicked nato reps out of Moscow, dispatched a spy ship to the Adriatic to monitor the U.S. fleet, threatened to send military supplies to Belgrade, boycotted nato’s 50th anniversary party in Washington. The citizenry has united behind its government for the first time in years, and the impetus is just this: Down with the West. (The U.S., meanwhile, has practically fawned over Russia, making plain its wishes for Russia to broker the peace deal with Belgrade—to the point now where the imf just gave them another $2 billion.)
The war has dealt a major blow to America’s shaky relations with China. China has been adamantly against nato’s campaign from the beginning, but the U.S.’s accidental bombing of the Chinese embassy in Belgrade on May 7 was a deal-breaker. It further uncovered an already seething global anti-Americanism—people, especially Chinese, spouting, “I want to kill Americans!” (It also put the United States again in the weak position of having to apologize to the international community for mistakes in the Yugoslav campaign.)
Even Jordan, a moderate, pro-Western Muslim nation with every reason to support intervention on behalf of the Muslim Kosovar Albanians, has been critical. “If nato’s aim was to protect civilians with air strikes, the alliance made a tragic miscalculation,” said the Jordan Times.
The Yugoslav conflict has even exacerbated deep division within Washington itself. Confusion reigned in Congress as they wrestled over whether the U.S. should fight, whether to send ground troops, how much to finance the military. And with every doubt and degrading self-examination on public display, the United States presented itself to the world as a country that can’t agree internally how committed it is to waging war.
In the world’s eyes, nato has failed. The United States has failed. And nations are seizing the chance, biting into America’s reputation with piranha-like ferocity.
We may completely set aside questions of whether or not the attacks are justified and still arrive at a chilling conclusion: What we are seeing is unprecedented. Kosovo marks the beginning of a new era.
The United States has been reluctant to use its power decisively since the Second World War. It is possible that now, in the face of failures in Kosovo, it may be skittish about using its power at all. Whether that is the case or not, the dynamics of this presently uni-polar world are lurching violently. Increasingly bold challenges to American supremacy are coming from several quarters. The post-cold-war era of the lone superpower U.S. has proved to be nothing more than an interregnum, a temporary anomaly.
Nature abhors a vacuum. When we speak of today’s “dangerous new world,” we primarily are talking about the power vacuum being created by an ever-weaker America and Britain—a vacuum which will be filled by nations with far-from-benign intent.
Of all the backlash from the war in Kosovo, the most worrisome has come out of Europe.
Though the job of absorbing criticism for a failed offensive in Yugoslavia seems to have fallen on the U.S., when it comes to dictating nato policy, Germany has ruled the roost. Relying on U.S. military strength, it is Germany that has been the primary force behind nato attacks. It is German interests which are best served by weakening Serbia.
Now that its aims in the present offensive have largely been realized, Germany is preparing for the next. When that comes, Germany doesn’t want to have to involve the U.S. Already it is pushing hard for an independent European military force.
Consider these details of nato’s “new strategic concept,” formalized during its 50th-year summit in April—deep in the midst of the Yugoslav war. The stated intent now is to reduce the present 19 decision-making voices within nato to around three or four—by making Europe a single voice. By removing the sovereignty of individual European members and integrating their military structures, nato would “prevent the renationalization of defense policies.” (This month, the EU will actually appoint a high-profile political figure to act as a single voice for the Union’s foreign policy.)
Add to this the seeds planted within Article 30 which the Trumpet discussed last month (p. 16) for Europe to be able to draw on nato resources to pursue objectives the U.S. isn’t interested in. That practically makes the Atlantic alliance a poor disguise for an independent Euroforce.
And further, consider that the new strategic concept cites virtually any reason you care to name as cause for use of nato force, over a much wider territory than has ever been considered its responsibility. “The new strategic concept represents madness on a colossal (perhaps we should say Imperial) scale” (Intelligence Digest, April 30).
Concurrent with these developments has been the sudden renewal of interest in the long-dormant military arm of the EU, the Western European Union (weu). “Alarmed by their dependence on the United States in nato’s military campaign against Serbia, European ministers vowed [May 11] to develop a robust common defense policy,” reported the New York Times. Though the weu has long been asleep, “a combination of the crisis in Kosovo…and a growing German determination to play an active security role in Europe appear to have led to a decisive shift of mood that may bring concrete results.”
This month, the weu, comprising over 40 nations but largely directed by the EU member nations, meets at its headquarters in Brussels to submit a plan for a European defense and security force to EU leaders for ratification. With Germany in the driver’s seat, currently holding the presidency of both the EU and G8 and being the strongest proponent of the weu, there is little doubt that the plan will be rushed through the EU vote and fully approved. This being the case, the EU could be in a position to have in place its own combined military by December 2000.
Though nato may currently be a convenient means to a militarily tough Europe, we can be sure that any alliance between Europe and the U.S. is bound to dissolve, and quickly; the EU will soak up nato resources for its own purposes. Whatever the mechanism, the bottom line is that Europe will be the next military powerhouse of the world, and a great deal of the groundwork has already been laid.
It is just as Trumpet editor-in-chief Gerald Flurry wrote last month: “The only real winner in our war with Yugoslavia will be Germany. America and Britain will be the great losers. They will grow weaker as Germany grows in power.” The war isn’t even over yet, and already we’re seeing just that.
There is a growing, but small, body of politicians, commentators and analysts expressing grave misgivings over these issues. The chain of events the watershed war over Kosovo has started is merely making them more plain to those with the eyes to see.
While some few are waking up to the alarm today, Herbert W. Armstrong, as editor in chief of The Plain Truth magazine (circulation 8 million in 1986) forecast many of these very problems as long as half a century ago. When Germany lay prostrate in the ashes of World War II, he told everyone they would rise again. As Europe sat dazed and fractured at war’s end, he prophesied of their unification. As America and Britain gloried in their victory, he told them they had just won their last war. Over five decades, Mr. Armstrong warned the world that a European military, economic and political combine would rise up to dominate the world scene for a brief period at the climax approaching the close of this present age of man.
Why has it taken half a century for the most expert analytical minds to catch up with Mr. Armstrong? Because he used a source of intelligence none of them ever tapped: that of revealed biblical prophecy. The Creator God of the Universe says he will do nothing without first revealing his intentions (Amos 3:7-8). That he has done, as current events are bearing out.
Following Mr. Armstrong’s death and the complete change in format of the magazine which he founded, the Trumpet magazine has continued in his tradition. But there is an important distinction: He wrote about what was yet to happen; today, much of what he predicted is presently happening. In many ways, where Mr. Armstrong prophesied of future events, we are merely giving current events their proper significance.
That is how close we are to the ringing down of this present age! And still the world at large is almost wholly unaware of what is about to occur. Despite the tumult of change and clamor of irreconcilable interests worldwide, people carelessly assume, with irresponsible, unfounded optimism, that mankind will somehow work things out.
He will not! In fact, the Bible says unequivocally that if God Himself did not intervene to stop him, mankind would annihilate himself! (Matt. 24:21-22). The fact that God will intervene is the only hope for a world bent on its own destruction. But it is a sure hope!
You must not ignore these momentous global shifts, nor should you fail to understand them. The Trumpet is your guide. Your early-warning news source.
This issue of the Trumpet, the second of a two-part special report, “Dangerous New World,” discusses the current fall of the United States and Britain—the who, how and why. It will help you to understand the significance. It will show you the alliance now building that will forcibly supplant the world’s present superpower. And, as further proof of the urgency of these times, this Trumpet highlights the already evident rise of the power that will subsequently challenge that European alliance.
The inexorable march of end-time events is happening. The years ahead will be full of horrifying shocks to a world asleep. We urge you to prepare yourself by taking the Trumpet seriously—and acting upon what you read.